marzano causal teacher evaluation model · an analysis conducted by oklahoma’s tle commission...

1

MARZANO CAUSAL TEACHER EVALUATION MODEL

TEACHER & LEADERSHIP EVALUATION

Prepared by Learning Sciences Marzano Center | April 2012

Prepared for the Oklahoma State Department of Education

2www.LearningSciences.com | www.MarzanoCenter.com

Learning Sciences Marzano Center promotes excellence in

public education by providing and developing next-generation

teacher and leadership evaluation tools and training. Built on a

foundation of expert research into best practices in partnership

with national researcher and author Dr. Robert Marzano,

Learning Sciences identifies, develops, and disseminates

cutting-edge resources in educational best practices. Our goal

is to support teachers to be highly effective, life-long learners,

and in doing so, to significantly impact student growth and

achievement over time.

OUR MISSION

175 Cornell Road • Suite 18 Blairsville, PA 15717

P 877.411.7114

TEACHER & LEADERSHIP EVALUATION


The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model has been approved as a recommended teacher

evaluation framework for the state of Oklahoma. According to state law, all local board of education evaluation policies must align with the Teacher and Leadership Effectiveness Evaluation (TLE) Commission recommendations by the 2013-2014 school year.

School districts have a historic opportunity to redevelop their teacher evaluation systems to create aligned, rigorous, and fair processes that support teacher growth and development. It is critical, as schools and districts choose an evaluation framework, that early decisions incorporate contemporary research and deep alignment to Oklahoma State Department of Education requirements. Teacher evaluation systems must not only evaluate current classroom practice, but give teachers the systematic, focused feedback and instruction they need to become better teachers.

Better teachers produce better students. The goal is to choose a flexible system that will powerfully impact student achievement.

An analysis conducted by Oklahoma’s TLE Commission determined the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model meets and exceeds established Oklahoma state selection criteria. The TLE Commission chose the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model as one of three approved models from a field of six frameworks. A survey disseminated to teachers, principals, and district administrators overwhelmingly favored the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model as the default state model. The Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model has been tested by hundreds of experimental/control studies that demonstrate the model’s significant impact on student achievement.

A Historic Opportunityfor Oklahoma Schools

Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model Validated in Real-World Classrooms for Measurable Student Achievement


Teaching is an enormously complex task. The skilled teacher draws on an artful combination of

practical experience, emotional intelligence, strategic knowledge, and the ability to adapt to differing student requirements. Even more, we believe that any committed teacher can and will become a better teacher with focused practice in research-based classroom strategies. Thus, a highly effective teacher evaluation model must:

• Recognize and accurately reflect the complexity of the teaching/learning process

• Give teachers and administrators specific instructional tools to organize their pedagogical goals and supply targeted, powerful feedback to help teachers grow to mastery

• Rest on a foundation of scientific research conducted in the real-world environment of working classrooms

• Be flexible and robust enough to accommodate evolving state standards and directives, and

• Effect measurable increases in student achievement and student growth over time.

The primary purpose of teacher evaluation is to develop skilled teaching practices, fostering continuous improvement. Secondly, the evaluation model must work to determine how individual teachers are improving; how groups of teachers are improving; and how the entire system (schools, districts, states) is improving.

Research tells us that the role of the teacher is the single greatest factor affecting student learning (Sanders, et al., 1996).

The most robust evaluation model will thrive in real classrooms with practicing teachers. It will advance teachers’ skills toward a goal of mastery and measurably impact student achievement. More specifically, a model’s individual elements, when used strategically by a teacher in the classroom, should quantifiably improve student learning. Stakeholders involved in determining the best model for their states and districts can, and must, make informed decisions based on the available research data. Evaluative systems that fail to help teachers move toward professional expertise will, in the end, fail Oklahoma students, too.

A Teacher Evaluation Model Must Build Expertise

“We are in our second year of using the Marzano Framework and iObservation for the supervision of instruction. We have found that Marzano’s research base has given us a good foundation for establishing a common language about effective instruction.”

Shirley Simmons, PhD Director of Staff Development and Student Achievement

Norman Public Schools

“[The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model] provides teachers with specific feedback to improve the quality of their teaching. We know that is the single most important factor when it comes to student achievement. The whole system is really focused on teacher improvement and development.

When we look at growth in our first and second benchmarks, we’ve seen a significant increase, and we attribute a lot of that to our ability to provide teachers with feedback on research-based strategies that, if they’re done correctly and at the right time, have a high opportunity to impact student achievement.”

Dr. Brian Staples Principal, Douglas Mid-High School

Oklahoma City

www.LearningSciences.com | www.MarzanoCenter.com

Building Expertise: A Challenge from the MET Report

The Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Report issued in January 2012 by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation spelled out the challenge for improving K-12 education in the next decade. When it comes to teacher evaluation models, adopting a rigorous and fair system for evaluating teachers for the purposes of promotion, retention, and hiring is an important area of focus. But such a system is not enough to ensure gains in student learning. The next generation of evaluation models must be designed to improve the quality of teaching over time.

In Gathering Feedback For Teaching: Combining High Quality Observations with Student Surveys and Achievement Gains, MET project authors stated this proposition very clearly, the quality of instruction matters. “Ideally,” the authors note, “an observation instrument should create a common vocabulary for pursuing a shared vision of effective instruction.” Again and again the authors return to this central point: “Ultimately, the goal is to use classroom observations to help teachers improve student outcomes.”

The authors note that untargeted professional development – in other words, generalized programs not based on individual assessments of teachers’ strengths and weaknesses – have little effect on teacher growth or student achievement. MET authors conclude: “The true promise of classroom observations is the potential to identify strengths and address specific weaknesses in teachers’ practice” (our italics).

Recent studies (Taylor and Tyler, 2011; Allen et al., 2011) have confirmed the value of individualized coaching and targeted feedback. The ideal evaluation model is a professional development model: It will rely on frequent observations over different lessons and sections of students; it will provide ample opportunities for focused feedback; and it will build teacher expertise over time.

A Teacher Evaluation Model Must Drive Student Achievement

The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model is unique in that it identifies a direct cause-and-effect relationship between elements

in the model (teaching strategies, rubrics, etc.,) and positive gains in student learning.

Over 500 studies have validated that the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model helps teachers raise student achievement in rural, suburban, and urban environments. Developed over five decades of research, the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model is both expansive enough to reflect the complexity of teaching and focused enough to encourage targeted feedback about classroom behaviors. The model is highly flexible, so that districts and individual schools may select any number of strategies from the 41 elements in Domain 1, on which to focus each year.

5

Dr. Robert Marzano Executive Director

Learning Sciences Marzano Center


Ease of Implementation The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model is Both Flexible and Specific

Typically, school districts may select a number of approaches to phase in the implementation of the

Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model. Some districts pilot the model as a growth and development framework in the first year to establish a common understanding and practice observation skills. Then, in the second year, they migrate to using the model for evaluation purposes.

Other districts introduce the overall model, then plan a timeline to focus on a specific set of strategies. As each set of strategies is introduced, corresponding professional development and time to practice is provided to evaluators and teachers. Each approach builds systematic and deep implementation for evaluators and teachers.

The power of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model lies in its flexibility and its specificity. It is flexible enough to allow for a phased-in approach, where teachers are rated on only a handful of classroom behaviors. But it is also specific enough to:

• Diagnose the full range of teacher practices

• Provide specific guidance to improve instruction

• Provide targeted feedback for improvement and teacher self-assessment

• Provide guidance on the appropriate instructional context in which to use each strategy

In other words, as teachers grow, the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model accommodates their increasing expertise. Using the model, teachers are able to plan appropriate strategies for the type of lessons they are teaching. The goal of the model is to ensure that teachers understand exactly how to improve their teaching to affect measurable gains in student achievement.

The Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model is grounded upon the assumption that teachers will build expertise from year to year over the course of their careers. Therefore, the model is set up to track a teacher’s growth as he or she develops specific skills during the school year. Evaluation becomes a flexible and dynamic tool, tracking teacher progress and improvement.

As teachers grow, the model accommodates their increasing expertise.

Furthermore, the model is, intrinsically, a professional development tool. It not only trains teachers in the skills necessary to build classroom expertise, it also provides mentoring, demonstrations of the 41 Domain 1 strategies, a library of video and print resources, and community and technical support. Professional development is built into the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model.

“The Marzano framework is informing my practice by really giving me something to think about in all the different areas that are addressed. It is a very complete model, and if I were to think about all of the pieces at one time it would be overwhelming. But because it’s broken up, I can concentrate on an area or two that I particularly want to improve in.

The best thing for me this year has been starting to use learning goals with my students. I always had learning goals before, but I’ve never had them posted and I never explained them to the students. We’re now starting to look at rubrics for our learning goals so that the student can monitor his or her own learning, and that has been really exciting.”

Frances Homme Teacher, Roberts Elementary School

Tallahassee, Florida


An Overview

The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model uses a unique, granular approach that offers very specific,

powerful feedback to teachers on instructional strategies with the goal of improving teacher effectiveness over time. The model focuses on Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors. These strategies have the greatest impact on improving instruction, which, in turn, translates to student achievement and growth.

Key Benefits• Accurate. Offers high levels of inter-rater

reliability, ensuring fairness and accuracy in teacher evaluation.

• Results-Oriented. Provides specific, focused feedback to streamline evaluation both for administrators and teachers. A library of resources helps teachers improve and work toward mastery in an array of instructional practices.

• Proven. Validated by decades of data analysis and on-site experimental/control studies in real classrooms correlating strategies to student achievement.

• Supportive. Consultants provide ongoing, in-depth training and scalable programs rooted in research to transform theory into practice.

The model itself causes student learning gains.

Percentile Gain For Specific Instructional Strategies

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Advance OrganizersBuilding Vocabulary

Effort and RecognitionFeedback

Graphic OrganizersHomework

Identifying Similarities and DifferencesInteractive Games

Nonlinguistic RepresentationsNote Taking

PracticeSetting Goals/ Objectives

Student Discussion/ ChunkingSummarizing

Tracking Student Progress and Scoring Scales

2

20

14

4

13

15

20

20

17

17

14

25

17

19

34

% Gain

Percentile Gain For Specific Instructional StrategiesGains Averaged from Multiple Experimental/Control Studies

Research Base and Validation Studies, Marzano, 2011

Domain 1, which contains 41 of the 60 elements, focuses on pedagogical strategies that have a direct causal link with student achievement. Domain 1 addresses what teachers do in the classroom: It reflects the intricacy of what happens during any given lesson and the natural flow of activities. The model is based on the premise that lessons are constructed with multiple parts and that each part of a lesson has distinct characteristics, routines, and processes. A model built to support teachers as they develop their skills must necessarily reflect the complexity of their work. But not all of the 41 elements need to be, or should be, observed in a single lesson. Domain 1 breaks down teaching into “thin slices” for richer diagnostic and feedback purposes.

Domain 2 focuses on planning and preparing for units of instruction and lessons within units. Because these elements are directly related to Domain 1, the better a teacher prepares, the more effective are his or her instructional choices.

Domain 3 addresses deliberate practice. It encourages teacher self-reflection in the areas of evaluating personal performance and developing and implementing a professional growth plan. When teachers receive specific and focused feedback using a common language of instruction, they increase their expertise and subsequently, student performance.

Domain 4 is the backdrop for the other domains and encourages a supportive culture. It addresses collegiality and professionalism, emphasizing opportunities to observe and discuss strategies. This domain supports teacher participation in lesson study, instructional rounds, teacher-led professional development, and professional learning communities in which teachers collaboratively examine evidence of student learning and the impact that specific instructional strategies have on learning.

The Research-Based Model Four Domains Directly Tied to Student Achievement

The Four Domains

8

For a more detailed explanation of the four Domains in the Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model or the nine Design Questions and 41 Strategies visit:

www.MarzanoCenter.com/teacher-evaluation

Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and BehaviorsDomain 1 is based on the Art and Science of Teaching Framework and identifies the 41 elements or instructional categories that happen in the classroom. The 41 instructional categories are organized into 9 Design Questions (DQs) and further grouped into 3 Lesson Segments to define the Observation and Feedback Protocol.

Domain 2: Planning and Preparing Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching Domain 4: Collegiality and Professionalism

Note: DQ refers to Design Question in the Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Framework. The nine (9) DQs organize the 41 elements in Domain 1.

The final Design Question, DQ10: Developing Effective Lessons Organized into a Cohesive Unit is contained in Domain 2: Planning and Preparing.

Lesson SegmentInvolving Routine Events

DQ1: Communicating Learning Goals and Feedback1. Providing Clear

Learning Goals and Scales (Rubrics)

2. Tracking Student Progress

3. Celebrating Success

DQ2: Helping Students Interact with New Knowledge 6. Identifying Critical Information 7. Organizing Students to Interact with New

Knowledge 8. Previewing New Content 9. Chunking Content into “Digestible Bites”10. Processing of New Information11. Elaborating on New Information12. Recording and Representing Knowledge13. Reflecting on Learning

DQ5: Engaging Students24. Noticing When Students are Not Engaged25. Using Academic Games26. Managing Response Rates27. Using Physical Movement28. Maintaining a Lively Pace29. Demonstrating Intensity and Enthusiasm30. Using Friendly Controversy31. Providing Opportunities for Students to Talk

about Themselves32. Presenting Unusual or Intriguing Information

DQ7: Recognizing Adherence to Rules and Procedures33. Demonstrating “Withitness”34. Applying Consequences for Lack of Adherence to Rules

and Procedures35. Acknowledging Adherence to Rules and Procedures

DQ8: Establishing and Maintaining Effective Relationships with Students36. Understanding Students’ Interests and Background37. Using Verbal and Nonverbal Behaviors that Indicate

Affection for Students38. Displaying Objectivity and Control

DQ9: Communicating High Expectations for All Students39. Demonstrating Value and Respect for Low

Expectancy Students40. Asking Questions of Low Expectancy Students41. Probing Incorrect Answers with Low Expectancy Students

DQ3: Helping Students Practice and Deepen New Knowledge14. Reviewing Content15. Organizing Students to Practice and Deepen

Knowledge16. Using Homework17. Examining Similarities and Differences18. Examining Errors in Reasoning19. Practicing Skills, Strategies, and Processes20. Revising Knowledge

DQ4: Helping Students Generate and Test Hypotheses21. Organizing Students for Cognitively

Complex Tasks22. Engaging Students in Cognitively Complex

Tasks Involving Hypothesis Generation and Testing

23. Providing Resources and Guidance

Planning and Preparing for Lessons and Units42. Effective Scaffolding of Information

within Lessons43. Lessons within Units44. Attention to Established Content

Standards

Evaluating Personal Performance50. Identifying Areas of Pedagogical

Strength and Weakness51. Evaluating the Effectiveness of

Individual Lessons and Units52. Evaluating the Effectiveness of

Specific Pedagogical Strategies and Behaviors

Promoting a Positive Environment55. Promoting Positive Interactions with Colleagues 56. Promoting Positive Interactions about Students

and Parents

Promoting Exchange of Ideas and Strategies57. Seeking Mentorship for Areas of Need or Interest58. Mentoring Other Teachers and Sharing Ideas

and Strategies

Promoting District and School Development59. Adhering to District and School Rules and

Procedures60. Participating in District and School Initiatives

Developing and Implementing a Professional Growth Plan53. Developing a Written Growth

and Development Plan54. Monitoring Progress Relative to

the Professional Growth and Development Plan

Planning and Preparing for Use of Resources and Technology 45. Use of Available Traditional

Resources46. Use of Available Technology

Planning and Preparing for the Needs of English Language Learners47. Needs of English Language Learners

Planning and Preparing for the Needs of Students Receiving Special Education 48. Needs of Students Receiving

Special Education

Planning and Preparing for the Needs of Students Who Lack Support for Schooling 49. Needs of Students Who Lack

Support for Schooling

DQ6: Establishing Rulesand Procedures4. Establishing Classroom

Routines5. Organizing the Physical

Layout of the Classroom

Lesson SegmentAddressing Content

Lesson SegmentEnacted on the Spot

Planning and Preparing Reflecting on Teaching Collegiality and Professionalism

9


Classroom observations are evolving. Not long ago, many teachers were evaluated just once every few

years. According to a number of studies, most teacher evaluations were not differentiated for individual performance. The feedback provided by administration was minimal. And without frequent, targeted feedback, it was difficult for even the most committed teachers to improve.

Oklahoma is setting new standards for evaluation: the Criteria for Effective Teaching sets out specific strategies and rubrics teachers are expected to use effectively in the classroom. (To see how the Oklahoma criteria align with the Marzano Model, visit www.MarzanoEvaluation.com/evaluation/Oklahoma_Teacher_Evaluation). Principals and other administrators are expected to conduct multiple observations on individual teachers during the school year. To ensure fairness, those observations must be of some length and range across different types of lessons.

The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model is a focused tool for observations – it not only helps teachers improve, it gives principals and observers clear guidelines for observation. Because the framework is so detailed, it relieves the burden on administrators to generate feedback sufficient to raise student achievement.

iObservation Data PlatformLearning Sciences International also provides iObservation: a unique, next-generation technology platform to support the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model and make classroom observations painless, paperless, and efficient. The iObservation platform additionally allows principals to make observation feedback available to teachers immediately, aligning growth, development, and evaluation in one simple and powerful tool. iObservation also supports Dr. Marzano’s School Leadership Evaluation Model.

Visit www.iObservation.com for more information.

About Classroom Observation

“I’ve heard more talk about instruction and effective instruction than I’ve heard in a long, long time, both among administrators and teachers and even among students. We really are focusing on effective teaching. And our evaluations are now not just perfunctory; they’re not just going in, checking off. There’s really a goal there to make every teacher the very best that they can be.”

Jo Marie Olk Director of Professional Learning and Instructional Development

Leon County Schools, Florida

“The iObservation tool that comes with the Marzano Model is amazing. It gives instant feedback to our teachers. I can go in their classrooms. I take my iPad with me. I pull up the iObservation tool. I can document what I see in their class. I can add some notes, some comments. I click finish, and instantly the teacher gets an email saying, ‘you have feedback.’ And our teachers really like that.”

Shelly Bell Principal, Cobb Middle School

Leon County, Florida

10


The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model was initially based on more than 5,000 studies that span

five decades. These studies have been chronicled and catalogued in books widely disseminated to teachers and principals in the United States. More than two million copies have been purchased by K-12 educators. They include What Works in Schools (Marzano, 2003), Classroom Instruction that Works (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001), Classroom Management That Works (Marzano, Pickering, & Marzano, 2003), Classroom Assessment and Grading that Work (Marzano, 2006), The Art and Science of Teaching (Marzano, 2007), and Effective Supervision: Supporting the Art and Science of Teaching (Marzano, Frontier, & Livingston, 2011). Each of these works was generated from a synthesis of research and theory.

Thus, the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model is an aggregation of the research on elements traditionally shown to correlate with student academic achievement.

To further test the effectiveness of the model, Dr. Marzano has partnered with state departments of education, districts, and schools across the nation to investigate the effectiveness of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model: specifically, to test the correlation with student achievement in real classrooms with students and teachers.

Over 500 teachers in 87 schools across the country participated in these experimental/control studies. The results showed a clear relationship between the model and student achievement. Further, achievement was correlated not only for the model as a whole, but between the 41 specific strategies in Domain 1 and student test scores. Those correlations were positive in all cases.

Background on the Research

• Research base and validation studies on the Marzano Evaluation Model (Marzano, 2011), www.MarzanoEvaluation.com/files/Research_Base_and_Validation_Studies_Marzano_Evaluation_Model.pdf

• Dr. Marzano’s Meta-Analytic Synthesis of Studies on Instructional Strategies (Haystead & Marzano, 2009), www.MarzanoEvaluation.com/files/Instructional_Strategies_Report_9_2_09.pdf

• Contemporary References adapted from Dr. Marzano’s Supervising the Art and Science of Teaching (Learning Sciences International, 2011), www.MarzanoEvaluation.com/files/Contemporary%20References%202000-2011-1.pdf

Math & Reading Proficiency Scores Correlated with 9 Design Questions

The Oklahoma State Department of Education commissioned Dr. Marzano in 2009-2010 to conduct a three-part study of Oklahoma schools. The study found a strong correlation between Dr. Marzano’s nine Design Questions and increased student achievement on state math and reading scores.

The studies aggregated student data from reading and math scores across the nine design questions in Domain 1. The highest correlations for D9, are associated with a 31 percentile point increase in student learning gains.

Research References


In a high-stakes environment, then, the observation model selected should show a researched correlation between teaching strategies and student achievement. The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model offers an extensive research base for high-stakes applications.

Learning Sciences International has partnered with Dr. Robert Marzano as the statewide provider of teacher evaluation technical assistance for Departments of Education across the nation. Learning Sciences provides low-cost training solutions to certify observers as required by the Oklahoma State Department of Education. Our professional development is aligned to support teachers as they learn to use the strategies. The model offers school administrators clear, easy-to-use scoring rubrics to provide targeted feedback on teachers’ implementation of the strategies in their instruction.

Learning Sciences has developed a document for Oklahoma that aligns the Marzano’s Teacher Evaluation Model (www.MarzanoEvaluation.com/evaluation/causal_teacher_evaluation_model/) to the state’s Criteria for Effective Teaching.

Download the alignment document at www.MarzanoEvaluation.com/alignment/oklahoma/ to see how the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model provides a means for teachers to translate Oklahoma’s Criteria for Effective Teaching into their daily practice.

Products & Services: Read about available implementation and redevelopment services at www.MarzanoEvaluation.com/evaluation/ getting_started.

Alignment to OSDE Standards, Training, and Support

Oklahoma’s new evaluation contains three components. Fifty percent of a teacher’s evaluation

score will be based on qualitative measures: scoring on classroom observations of instructional practice.

The remaining 50 percent will be based, after the initial pilot year, on quantitative measures: student academic growth as measured by state test scores (35 percent) and other academic measures (15 percent).

Other Academic Measures

15%

Student Academic Growth 35%

Qualitative: Instructional Practice

50%

Instructional Practice Measured by the

Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model


“Marzano’s Art and Science of Teaching has changed my practices this year. I’m always trying to figure out what I can do better. You have to look at yourself first. Student performance is primarily about the teacher. You can put 15 or 20 or 30 students in that classroom and it’s the teacher’s responsibility to be able to influence them and impact them with the rigorous curriculum and engage them. And Marzano does speak to that.”

Joseph Bowen Teacher, Cobb Middle School

Tallahassee, Florida

The Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model is Designed to Move an Evaluation System

FROM TO

Compliance-focused, annual reviews that are inflated and lack specific guidance for instructional improvement

Formative and summative process that is timely and specific and honors growth over time

Misaligned system without specificity in the common language of instruction

Coherent research-based common language of instruction with clear and objective measures and teacher and student evidences

Ambiguity and subjectivity due to the lack of specificity

Clarity, accuracy and consistency of observation from the newest teacher to the most veteran practitioners

No documented connections to student achievement gains

Research-based links to raising student achievement

Summary


Frequently Asked Questions

According to the Marzano Causal Teacher Evaluation Model, what is the definition of good teaching?

Teaching is challenging and complex work that requires deep understanding of each student, curriculum, instruction, and assessment in ways that enable all students to be successful. Our definition of an effective teacher is one who makes instructional decisions that produce student learning gains.

Where has the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model been used and what data do you have regarding its efficacy?

Currently, the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model is used in 50 states, Canada, Australia, and countries in Europe, Asia and South America. Five hundred teachers in 87 schools embedded in 26 districts have participated in experimental/control studies to examine the efficacy of specific strategies in their classrooms. The research has yielded more than 1,000 effect sizes for specific strategies associated with Domain 1 of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model. A synthesis of over 300 of these studies indicates that on average, the strategies addressed were associated with an effect size of .42, with some studies reporting effect sizes of 2.0 and higher. An effect size of .42 is associated with a 16 percentile point gain in student achievement. Other studies have correlated those same specific strategies, used by individual teachers, with student achievement growth as measured by state test scores. Finally, new research conducted in 2012 has examined the reliability of classroom observations using the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model.

How does the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model promote a collaborative environment among educators?

The premise of the entire model is based on a reciprocal process of feedback, one in which teachers and administrators as well as peers participate in conversations with each other about teaching and learning around a common instructional framework. Domain 4 recognizes the importance of collegial relationships and focused professional development aligned with a teacher’s areas of strengths, needs, and interests.

How does the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model differ from other models that have been approved in Oklahoma?

The Marzano Teacher Evaluation offers an entirely new perspective on teacher evaluation based on contemporary research in education and cognitive psychology, making an explicit link between what teachers are doing and the result of instruction in the classroom. In this model, student achievement data is combined with teacher growth in pedagogy to provide a more informative, justifiable, and fair approach to teacher evaluation.

Each of the elements within the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model has a strong research base spanning 35 years and is directly linked to student achievement. The model provides clear, specific, and observable descriptions of teaching found to have a positive impact on student learning. It also recognizes different stages of development progressing toward expertise in teaching observed and documented over time. Additionally, the iObservation technology platform makes the model accessible on a computer or iPad, which decreases paperwork and improves data collection.

On average, when teachers use the classroom strategies and behaviors in this model, typical student achievement increased by 16 percentile points.


How do you ensure quality training of administrators and teachers?

Learning Sciences International works very closely with districts and schools to train teachers and observers. Professional development services for teachers and administrators include multiple-day and multiple-year in-person professional development, online self-study, facilitated study groups, and a graduate program in partnership with Wilkes University that offers a competency-based Masters of Science in the Art and Science of Teaching. Professional development sessions are targeted toward district and school leaders, instructional coaches, and teachers and are designed to meet the specific needs of each group. Observer and staff developer certification programs are available. All professional development programs help districts build defensible and reliable evaluation systems that align professional development and student learning with a multi-measure teacher evaluation system.

What tools are used to conduct walkthroughs, observations, and the final evaluation?

The protocol sheets for each element are the tools that are used when conducting walkthroughs and observations. The final evaluation is a by-product that comes from the data collected throughout the entire process. The final evaluation is an output that comes from the database. iObservation creates this automatically.

Will classroom walkthroughs be used as part of evaluation?

That depends on your individual school or district policies. We recommend as many observations as possible for increased accuracy of ratings.

Are tools available for teachers to self-assess?

Yes, self-assessment is a major component of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model. Self-assessment is vital for teachers in planning lessons, improving the strategies they use in the classroom, and in achieving expertise. Self-assessment is also useful as a tool to prepare for formal evaluations and to process feedback from formal evaluations.

How does the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model mesh with the collective bargaining agreement?

Collective bargaining agreements typically focus on policies and procedures such as frequency of observations, types of observations, timeliness of feedback to teachers, and supports for struggling teachers. Learning Sciences provides districts with a comprehensive review of their policies and procedures with recommendations and examples that reflect current research to support teacher growth and development. The Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model and Learning Sciences has a strong track record in achieving support from local teacher associations.

Is an administrator required to observe all 41 elements in Domain 1?

Not at all. We recognize that teachers use different strategies for different lesson segments or types of lessons. In some cases, principals and teachers may decide to focus on and look for improvement in a select number of the 41 strategies during a phase-in process.

Will the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model replace the former teacher evaluations in my school?

Yes, although Learning Sciences works closely with schools during the implementation process to ensure that the specific vision or values of the school are incorporated into use of the framework.

What assistance is available on the use and creation of learning goals and scales?

Learning Sciences offers professional development for goals and scales, including online help and in-person sessions.

marzano causal teacher evaluation model · an analysis conducted by oklahoma’s tle commission...

Documents